R. v. Strecko, 2009 SCC 2, [2009] 1 SCR 64

                                                 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

Between:

Michel Strecko

Appellant

and

Her Majesty The Queen

Respondent

Official English Translation

Coram : Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron and Cromwell JJ.

______________________________

R. v. Strecko, 2009 SCC 2, [2009] 1 S.C.R. 64

Michel Strecko                                                                                                                   Appellant

v.

Her Majesty The Queen                                                                                                 Respondent

Indexed as:  R. v. Strecko

Neutral citation:  2009 SCC 2.

File No.:  32679.

2009:  January 14.

Present:  Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron and Cromwell JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec

Criminal law — Extortion — Acquittal — Court of Appeal substituting conviction — Substitution justified.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal, 2008 QCCA 871, J.E. 2008-1069, [2008] SOQUIJ AZ-50491225, [2008] J.Q. n^o 3837 (QL), 2008 CarswellQue 3773, setting aside the accused’s acquittal and entering a conviction. Appeal dismissed, Fish and Cromwell JJ. dissenting. 

Marie‑Hélène Giroux and Clément Monterosso, for the appellant.

Harry Pierre‑Étienne and Michel Pennou, for the respondent.

English version of the judgment of the Court delivered orally by

[1]     LeBel J. — The majority of the Court consider that the trial judge drew the necessary findings from the evidence and that the substitution of a conviction for the acquittal was justified in the circumstances.  The appeal is accordingly dismissed.  Fish and Cromwell JJ., dissenting, would have allowed the appeal in part to order a new trial.

Judgment accordingly.

Solicitors for the appellant:  Monterosso Giroux, Montréal.

Solicitor for the respondent:  Poursuites criminelles et pénales du Québec, Montréal.